Is 6.3 MP enough?

[Duke107]

Hi all,

I'm looking to supliment my G2 (which I love aside from AF being so slow) and have been leaning towards the 10D. I am not going to use this or any other cam for anything more than home use meaning day to day family shots or family outings. I want to buy a cam that I can be happy with for a few years and invest in accessories. Is 6.3 Mp and the 10D a good choice, I really mean is 6.3 Mp give decent croping abilities? My 4.1 MP G2 does a ok job at 5x7 prints but I would like a little better than its capabilities. Does anyone know if 10D is going to be replaced soon? and if so how many MP is anticipated and should I wait. I really wanted a Pro 1 (8MP for croping) but have decided its not enough of a upgrade from my G2 and has simular AF characteristics.

[blinking8s]

the MP dont even matter really, well they do, but when you shoot raw DPI and everything is in effect, which you can export as needed...

the 10d will print you some pretty big clear photos,

but is a 10d MK II coming out? ive read rumors but never up on it, if not I would get the 10d ina heartbeat if I had the money

the largest picture ive ever had printed from my 300d was A4 and it was clear as could be after processing the RAW file..

[Haifidelity]

The quick answer: YES.

I have a 10D (6.3MP) and a S50 (5MP) and am able to get great 8X10's from both, as well as larger (20X30's) from the 10D.

For 4X6's & 5X7's with the 10D, I can effectively crop or reduce the image size 50% of it's native resolution and get excellent quality. I used to send the full 6.3MP to the developer, but i decided to cut down the size and have not noticed and loss in quality (which would make it effectively a 3MP print).

The 10D's sensor is bigger than the Prosumer 8MP's, allowing for a greater lattitude in terms of image noise and ability for upconverting for larger printing (at least in higher ISO's).

If you do not plan on printing anything larger than say 20x30, then there's no reason that 6.3MP isn't enough resolution for you.

[randyk]

As Haifidelity said, the big difference in these cameras is the larger sensor size in the 1OD. That will make a far bigger difference than the minor increase in pixels.

I would expect that a 4mp crop from a 10D will look far better than a full size 10D image. And a crop from a 1D, which is only 4mp to start with will look better than shots from either camera, the 1D images have incredible detail, even cropped. I have owned the G2 and 10D in the past and my experience is that there is a quantum leap in quality from the G2 to 10D but a smaller yet significant increase from 10D to 1D.

You are wise to bypass any of the 8mp digicams, the improvement will be marginal other than the longer lens. Buying one of these near $1000 makes no sense to me when the price of the Digital Rebel body is $800 or less.

[Duke107]

Thanks all,

I am pleased to hear that the 10D is that good of a cam, I just saw those pics of the Thunderbirds and I almost fell off my chair (those of you who have seen them taken with a 10D)

Anyone found any reason to keep a lessor cam such as a G series or do you find you really never go bak to it?

[drisley]

When I went from my G3 to the 300D, I knew there was a 50% increase in pixels.
BUT, when I started checking DPI in my crops, I was getting MUCH more than 50% over the G3. Why? Because of the 3:2 aspect ratio on the DSLR.

As soon as I opened a G3 image, it HAD to be cropped for a 4x6, so really you only got around 3mpixels useable (guessing there).
Images straight out of the 300D and 10D are fully useable at 4x6. So, if you are someone who prints alot at 4x6, you are in effect doubling your printable resolution with the 300D/10D over the G2/G3.

This is something that is often overlooked. In addition, I find I lose much less when cropping at 5x7 and 8x10 compared to the G3.

Also, like randyk said, the sensor of the 300D/10D will give you less noise/better resolution than a G series. And there is more! If you get quality lenses, you will get even more detail/contrast out of your images.

Frankly I was amazed at how much better 100% crops looked with my 300D vs the G3. And the images sharpened MUCH nicer, holding more detail with fewer artifacts.

I would take a 6.3Mpixel DSLR over an 8Mpixel Point & Shoot anyday.

[Canuck]

You are wise to bypass any of the 8mp digicams, the improvement will be marginal other than the longer lens. Buying one of these near $1000 makes no sense to me when the price of the Digital Rebel body is $800 or less.

I'm playing the devil's :twisted: advocate showing both sides of the perverbial coin.

No it wouldn't be wise to go DSLR...
The real money can be spent on lenses, sure you can get the kit lens that gives you the 18-55mm range but that is the only range you have unless you buy another lens and that is where you can blow some serious cash! Believe me there are lenses out there that are seriosly expensive, like my beast the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8EX which I got in Aug, 03 from B&H for $1900. There is also software out ther that is far better than the Canon provided FVU (File Viewer Utility). Elements 2.0 isn't too shabby. I guess it comes down to how much you want to put into the setup.

Yes it would be wise to get a Pro 1 or similar...
If you go for the likes of the Pro 1, then you have a 35-200 35mm effective zoom, I believe or close to it. The Pro 1 has an L lens on there that is slightly faster than the F2.8 lenses I have at the wide end. End of the day, you would be all set and ready to take pics as soon as you charge batteries. Getting to know and like the 10D can take some time! You may well find that the first lot of pics you junk. This is the awesome part of digital, no need to develop them.

Just some points to ponder.

[Shaner (Ut)]

Thanks all,

I am pleased to hear that the 10D is that good of a cam, I just saw those pics of the Thunderbirds and I almost fell off my chair (those of you who have seen them taken with a 10D)

Anyone found any reason to keep a lessor cam such as a G series or do you find you really never go bak to it?

Yes, Duke, those where some amazing shots :wink: ..lol
I have the 10D, 300D, and 2 G3s. The 10D is a great camera :D but I still have a G3 with me at all times and it still gets a lot of use. Its a sweet little camera and a lot easier to pack around than a 10D with a 400mm lens, and I have had some real nice 11 x 14 prints made from it, so make sure ya hold on to your G2 too.

Happy Clicking,
Shaner

[Duke107]

I wish the pro 1 was better at AF than I am reading about but that is what is leading me to the 10D. I must admitt I am a novice in all respects to the art of photography but I do love it more every day. My intent was to get some decent non L glass lenses at least at this time thinking i,m better off with non L glass than the Pro 1 with.

[RikWriter]

Hate to speak ill of Canon in a Canon forum, but I've tried the Pro 1 and I didn't like it at all. The zoom is slow and awkward and the controls are not intuitive IMHO.
If you're considering an 8MP camera, I would go with the Sony 828. The sensors in all the 8MP point and shoots are Sony anyway, may as well get the Carl Zeiss lens to go with it.
That said, there is no way in hell I would go with one of the 8MPs over a Digital Rebel. Were I you, I would (and did) go with the Digital Rebel with kit lens over the 10D. From the needs you specified, it should do you well, together with a couple more lenses (for what you listed, some sort of 70 or 80-200 and a 50 prime would probably do it for a while) and an external flash.

[Andy_T]

No it wouldn't be wise to go DSLR...

<snip>

Yes it would be wise to get a Pro 1 or similar...

<snip>

Just some points to ponder.

Luckily for you, it doesn't take much time to ponder Canuck's points.

Yes, you will have to buy some lenses as well, but

No, that's nowhere near a problem.

You just don't have to buy the most expensive lenses available.

A good starting set could include
- the kit lens (OK, though nowhere near great, the cheapest way to get wide angle coverage in the beginning): 100$
- the 1.8/50 as a great low light lens 80$
- the 70-200 f/4 L as great tele lens: 600$

So you're a little than 50% more expensive than the Pro1, but you've invested that money with the option to keep the lenses and later add to them, if needed.

E.g., you could upgrade the Kit lens to the 17-40L (some 600$, again), as soon as you feel the need for quality wide angle. That outfit will stay with you for quite some time. If you need a better cam in some years, you can keep the lenses (apart from the kit lens which only works on the DRebel) and buy a new camera. You can't do that with the Pro1.

Best regards,
Andy

PS: And yes, keep your G series. You'll find a lot of opportunities just to slip it into your pocket to take somewhere where you don't want to lug around all your DSLR equipment.

[drisley]

All good points.

It really depends upon how serious you are about photography, and what type of photography you want to do.

I just HATE the fact that you normally cant get any sort of shallow DOF with a P&S (especially with anything that isnt very close range). To my eye that can really take away from an image. Again, it depends on the person and their usage.

[Pekka]

Hate to speak ill of Canon in a Canon forum, but I've tried the Pro 1 and I didn't like it at all. The zoom is slow and awkward and the controls are not intuitive IMHO.
If you're considering an 8MP camera, I would go with the Sony 828. The sensors in all the 8MP point and shoots are Sony anyway, may as well get the Carl Zeiss lens to go with it.

A friend of mine bought the Sony 828 on a whim and yesterday we took some high ISO shots with it. We checked the images on my screen and basically anything above ISO 100 was useless and ISO 400 and 800 were totally bad. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf828/page14.asp shows this too. The camera looks nice but the image quality is definitely not there. I think I convinced him to take it back and get a 300D instead - he knows I am a Canon DSLR user and have this site and all but people do seem listen to dealers more in the end :(

[RikWriter]

A friend of mine bought the Sony 828 on a whim and yesterday we took some high ISO shots with it. We checked the images on my screen and basically anything above ISO 100 was useless and ISO 400 and 800 were totally bad.

That's symptiomatic of all the 8MP cameras with that sensor, including the Canon. You simply have to set the ISO for 100 or below and leave it there.

[Duke107]

Sony makes a decent TV snd digital camcorder but I am already sold on Canon's dedication to this industry although maybe not perfect either. I have a friend with a 300D which he loves and I like what I,v seen but thought if I'm going to make the plunge, for a few bucks more I will definately buy a 10D for the magnesium body alone. Even though I'm a novice I want something I'm not longing to replace next year because of some limitation to the cam. I know that this hobby is addicting which is why I,m hoping to grow into the cam I clearly won't be able to take full advantage of imediately.

[randyk]

I'm playing the devil's :twisted: advocate showing both sides of the perverbial coin.

No it wouldn't be wise to go DSLR...
The real money can be spent on lenses, sure you can get the kit lens that gives you the 18-55mm range but that is the only range you have unless you buy another lens and that is where you can blow some serious cash! Believe me there are lenses out there that are seriosly expensive, like my beast the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8EX which I got in Aug, 03 from B&H for $1900. There is also software out ther that is far better than the Canon provided FVU (File Viewer Utility). Elements 2.0 isn't too shabby. I guess it comes down to how much you want to put into the setup.

Yes it would be wise to get a Pro 1 or similar...
If you go for the likes of the Pro 1, then you have a 35-200 35mm effective zoom, I believe or close to it. The Pro 1 has an L lens on there that is slightly faster than the F2.8 lenses I have at the wide end. End of the day, you would be all set and ready to take pics as soon as you charge batteries. Getting to know and like the 10D can take some time! You may well find that the first lot of pics you junk. This is the awesome part of digital, no need to develop them.

Just some points to ponder.

The potential cost of a DSLR system is a valid consideration. But the choice range of lenses is broad, so you can get long glass without spending thousands of dollars. I view the lens options as a plus - if you are willing to pay the price, you can do any type of photography you are interested in while you are clearly limited with any fixed lens camera.

The high end digicams may be a good fit for certain people, I am sure they will take excellent pictures in average or less demanding situations. But the problem is if you move on to tougher situations - bad lighting, action photography, birds, etc. you will likely need a better system.

[santa]

When a person is talking about buying a camera they may well grow out of within a year I always suggest they look at something used. I know nothing at all about Canon's plans, but it's obvious that the 10D will get an upgrade relatively soon. For family outings and home shooting, flash is a critical issue. The newer technology that Canon is employing with the ETTL II on recent cameras is, I think, I big deal for point and shoot home snapshots. If you are looking for a camera that will last you a couple of years, it may well be the 10D replacement, but I think you'd have 10DII envy very soon from now.
I rarely tell people to wait when buying computers or cameras, but buying a used 10D right now would seem to me to make great sense.
Everyone "knows" the 10D will be replaced but nobody knows when or what will be changed. Some things are no brainers like ETTL II.
A 10D with 6mp is a far, far superior camera to an f828. I have an f717 and a 10D. No camparison. None. And none between the 828 either. And no comparison between the 10D and the Pro 1 either. Just my opinion. Everyone is welcome to be disagree and be wrong. :) :) :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Get the rebel...

[MarkH]

My view on the 300D vs 10D is this:
If you shoot fast action (sports, birds in flight, kids, etc) then the 10D is the better choice with its 9 frame buffer as opposed to the 300D with its 4 frame buffer.

If you don't need the fast shooting 9 frame buffer then the 300D will produce the same quality of photos at a better price.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'm sorry.. was this a Rebel Vs. 10D threads.. I got lost and thought it was a Rebel Vs. Pro 1 thread :roll: (ie 6.3MP Vs. 8MP)

If this is the case.. then get the 10D

Either way.. the 6.3 MPs of the DSLR Cmos in BOTH Cameras will blow away any 8MP digicam out there!

[MarkH]

I'm sorry.. was this a Rebel Vs. 10D threads.. I got lost and thought it was a Rebel Vs. Pro 1 thread :roll: (ie 6.3MP Vs. 8MP)

If this is the case.. then get the 10D

Either way.. the 6.3 MPs of the DSLR Cmos in BOTH Cameras will blow away any 8MP digicam out there!

The thread starter had already decided against the Pro1 and simply asked the group if we felt 6MPix is sufficient. Most replies suggested that 6MPix was fine and that the D-SLR was indeed the way to go. Some suggested the idea of getting a 300D instead of the 10D that was being considered. Personally I like my 10D and agree with the Pro 1 not being worth getting (slow AF, non-interchangeable lens, limited DoF control).

The 300D should be considered alongside the 10D because they will both give the same image quality. However it is important to consider the limitations of the 300D because no firmware hack will give it 3fps for 9 frrames, this makes it less suitable for fast action shooting.

My suggestion would be to get the 10D, 50mm f1.8 and 28-135 IS, then start saving while enjoying the camera. Depending on the photography being done you will want different lenses e.g. wider, longer, faster (lower f numbers), higher quality (L Lenses) or a combination of some of those features. If using flash then the onboard flash will be limiting and a 550EX will be desired fairly quickly.

[Duke107]

Yes Mark you are correct, I have no intentions of buying a pro 1. If I did not own a G2 I might consider it for the compact size (mostly retracting lens) but I am set on a dslr. I may consider a 300D if I find a special deal but my thought is to get the 10D. I would think it will have a better resale when it is replaced by newer cams as well. I also like the better burst shooting capabilities as I am also a race car fan and would take it to such events as the Molson Indy etc... Money has not been the driving force for my decision as I can afford the 10D and many future accessories with some limitation to the L glass prices. I'm really trying to enhance my photagraphy skills and want a good hobby camera for non professional use that can capture those moments that my G2 is not capable of due primarily to the slugish AF and limited lense. I know the 300D is just as good a cam for my use.

[blinking8s]

here is a full res jpg for reference if you want it, remember, you still have RAW and can export the raws @ any dpi you wish...huge advantage to jpeg, but im not posting my 30mb raw now ;)

shot on a 300d...i think the jpeg was set to high, humm...oh well, here you go

this is at 6.3MP 3072 x 2048 @ 180dpi (well, not on your screen)

http://www.blinking8s.com/photos/IMG_0209.JPG

PS live breathe and eat RAW...jpeg sucks

[MarkH]

Yes Mark you are correct, I have no intentions of buying a pro 1. If I did not own a G2 I might consider it for the compact size (mostly retracting lens) but I am set on a dslr. I may consider a 300D if I find a special deal but my thought is to get the 10D. I would think it will have a better resale when it is replaced by newer cams as well. I also like the better burst shooting capabilities as I am also a race car fan and would take it to such events as the Molson Indy etc... Money has not been the driving force for my decision as I can afford the 10D and many future accessories with some limitation to the L glass prices. I'm really trying to enhance my photagraphy skills and want a good hobby camera for non professional use that can capture those moments that my G2 is not capable of due primarily to the slugish AF and limited lense. I know the 300D is just as good a cam for my use.

If you can afford the 10D and will shoot motorsport then I would suggest forgetting the 300D and getting the 10D. 9 frame buffer is a lot better than 4 frame buffer when the action happens.

[hmhm]

remember, you still have RAW and can export the raws @ any dpi you wish...huge advantage to jpeg

Henh? You've got the same 6MP whether you shoot RAW or JPG. What meaning does DPI have, except when you're printing it?
-harry

[blinking8s]

when blowing a picture up dpi has more than a lot to do with the size of your prints, at least when it comes to maintaining image clarity and keeping the img from distorting

[vfilby]

Megapixels are deceiving, inorder to double the image resolution you have to square the megapixel count. The difference between 6.3 and 8 is only about 200 pixels horizontally and 400 vertically. Camera companies love saying they are a higher megapixel camera because it makes the difference seem like much more than it is.

Vince